HKSAR v. Loua Micheal

HCCC 141/2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 141 OF 2017

-----------------

-----------------

----------------------------------------------------

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

----------------------------------------------------

COURT:

The defendant pleaded guilty before a magistrate to one charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug and was committed to the Court of First Instance for sentence. In sentencing, I have considered the whole circumstances of the case including its nature and facts, in particular the type and quantity of the dangerous drug involved, background of the defendant and mitigation put forward on his behalf.

The facts of the case may be summarised as follows. The defendant arrived in Hong Kong by air from Nigeria, via Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. He was suspected to have internal concealment and was sent to a hospital. On the following day, he discharged six packets containing a total of 349 grammes of a solid containing 230 grammes of cocaine. In a subsequent interview, he admitted under caution that he was recruited to deliver the pellets for a promised reward of US$1,500 since he was in need of money. He said he did not know the content of the pellets which he swallowed.

The defendant was born in Nigeria and holds a Guinean passport. He is 29 years old, single. He received limited education and was engaged in buying and selling of goods which yielded very low income.

In mitigation, learned defence counsel, Mr McGowan, stressed that the defendant pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and he is now full of remorse. Mr McGowan told the court that the parents of the defendant passed away in turn when the defendant was still in his very tender age. The defendant was then looked after by his aunt who also passed away when he was still a boy. Without care and support of the family, the defendant grew up in very difficult situation and received very little formal education. He was in great financial stress. Under such situation, he succumbed to temptation and agreed to take up this job. He was promised a reward which he has not yet received.

A letter of the defendant was produced in which the defendant expressed remorse. Mr McGowan said the defendant is prepared to pursue study when he is serving the sentence, to equip himself to turn over a new leaf.

Mr McGowan also pointed out that the quantity of drug involved was relatively low in this nature of case and that the customs acted on information in stopping the defendant and these are indications that the defendant was subject to exploitation by others. The defendant had been told very little about this operation. Therefore, despite he desired to help the authority, he has little information to offer.

In the case AG v Pedro Nel Rojas [1994] 2 HKCLR 69, it was held that the guidelines for sentence in Queen v Lau Tak Ming [1990] 2 HKLR 370 are applicable to cases of trafficking in cocaine. In Lau Tak Ming, the Court of Appeal suggested that for sentencing in heroin of a quantity of 200 to 400 grammes, a sentence between 12 and 15 years’ imprisonment should be considered.

In all the circumstances of the present case, I do not consider there are any reasons to justify departure from the tariff. It has been held that international element is an aggravating factor. Having regard to HKSAR v Rungrueang Chutikan, CACC 430/2011, I enhance the sentence by 6 months. In all the circumstance, I adopt a starting point of 12 years and 9 months.

The defendant pleaded guilty and for this reason, he is entitle to a one-third discount. Having considered the whole circumstances, including mitigation and submission by learned defence counsel, in my judgment, this is the extent of discount the defendant is entitled to.

For the above-said reasons, I sentence you to an imprisonment term of 8½ years.